A majority of early-state insiders believe it’s helpful for Rand Paul to differentiate himself from the Republican field through his views on foreign policy and national security. But over the course of the campaign, many say, those same positions will prove to be a serious liability.

This week’s survey of the POLITICO Caucus — a bipartisan group of the most influential operatives and activists in Iowa and New Hampshire — found that 61 percent of those polled overall said that the Kentucky senator’s anti-interventionist and libertarian-oriented positions are helping to distinguish him in a pack of nearly 20 candidates.

Story Continued Below

Yet that number dropped to 48 percent among just Republican respondents.

In a reflection of the ideological distinctions between the Republican parties in New Hampshire and Iowa, New Hampshire Republicans were more inclined to look favorably on Paul’s “odd-man-out” status than Iowa Republicans: Sixty percent of Granite Staters who responded said it’s helpful to break with the party; while only 37 percent of Hawkeye State Republicans said the same. In both states, many insiders said Paul’s stances likely preclude him from being the GOP nominee.

“It helps him stand out, but it also puts a low ceiling on his support. Not enough to win the nomination,” said a New Hampshire Republican, who like all members of the POLITICO Caucus was granted anonymity in order to speak freely.

An Iowa Republican was even more blunt: “Helps him with his base of liberty followers. But God help us if someone like him was ever to be President. His foreign policy and national security views are more frightening than any prominent Democrat, save Sen. Sanders.”

Those comments follow a contentious week for Paul, who is already in the cross hairs of his more hawkish GOP competitors. On Wednesday, Paul appeared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” where he blamed Republican hawks for the rise of the Islamic State (also known as ISIS or ISIL). The comments sparked sharp criticism from several other Republican candidates and some POLITICO insiders, and earned him a caustic headline on The Wall Street Journal editorial page that read, “Rand Paul created ISIS.”

“Rand was trying not to be his father [former Rep. Ron Paul], he had taken the most serious approach to date in reaching out beyond the confines of our primary base, to build upon his father’s base,” said a New Hampshire Republican. “But his ISIS comments were way over the line, almost Obama-like in blaming the [medieval] Christian crusades as the cause of ISIS. This will sink his chances to break out from Ron Paul 2012.”

Going a step further, an Iowa Republican added, “It solidifies his ceiling at under 10 percent. Every day that passes it appears that Rand Paul should be Hillary Clinton’s [Democratic] primary opponent.”

Many Republicans who said his views were helpful in separating him from the pack said they shored up his libertarian base, provided a boost to his poll numbers and energized his natural constituency at a time when competitors are struggling to get noticed as they compete for the same blocs of voters.

“Like it or not, Paul’s message separating himself from other candidates helps him stand out among a large field,” said an Iowa Republican.

“It helps him early when you can be a star with 20 percent, but as the field narrows, the early advantage he had is eroded because it isolates him from where the party really is and from where our nominees usually come,” a New Hampshire Republican said.

Paul’s filibuster-like speech last week in the Senate, designed to derail reauthorization of the PATRIOT Act, did not generate such strong feelings among GOP insiders. A third of Iowa Republicans said it hurt him, but 44 percent said it had no impact, while 67 percent of more libertarian-minded New Hampshire Republicans said it helped him.

“Paul’s filibuster helped to bring home a lot of wandering supporters of his father who weren’t sold on Rand,” a New Hampshire Republican said. “By using the issue to clarify himself from Cruz, it sent a clear signal to libertarians as to who their candidate was.”

Here are three other takeaways from this week’s POLITICO Caucus:

Sanders steals the spotlight — for now.

As far as Democratic primary activity goes, this is a big week. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders had his official presidential campaign rollout Tuesday, while former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley is expected to announce his bid Saturday in Baltimore. Roughly nine out of 10 Iowa and New Hampshire Democrats — 86 percent in Iowa; 89 percent in New Hampshire — say Sanders is better-positioned to gain traction as a liberal alternative to Hillary Clinton, the party’s dominant front-runner.

“Sanders’ message is catnip for the left of the party,” said one unaffiliated Iowa Democrat. “O’Malley is trying to thread a near-left needle, and there isn’t room. Why caucus for slightly left of Hillary when Sanders is offering the real thing?”

Sanders has an obvious constituency, many noted. It’s less clear what the O’Malley base looks like.

“I just don’t see the argument for O’Malley,” said a New Hampshire Democrat. “Sanders can reliably go to Clinton’s left, but where does O’Malley go? Why would somebody feel inspired by Martin O’Malley?”

“Sanders by a long shot,” added another. “He’s perfectly in tune with aging baby boomer progressives who are in ‘I’m-mad-as-hell-and-I’m-not-going-to-take-this-anymore’ mode, and that’s a pretty sizable population in New Hampshire. He’s going to finish 2nd in the Primary; the question is how strong of a 2nd.”

A third Granite Stater noted,“Bernie Sanders speaks directly to the hearts of Democrats and has been drawing big crowds in New Hampshire. No one is excited about O’Malley, and despite numerous visits he hasn’t gained any traction.”

Only three Democrats, of the 26 who responded to the question, said O’Malley is better-positioned. An Iowa Democrat said so because “He’s got better staff. And he’s more electable. Bernie will be more liberal, but isn’t electable.”

But as a New Hampshire Republican noted, “There’s only room for one non-Hillary, and Sanders out-flanks O’Malley. With two of them, neither goes anywhere. And both of them together don’t add to half of [Elizabeth] Warren.”

Prepare for a possible Rick Perry boomlet in Iowa.

By the end of next week, former Sen. Rick Santorum, former Gov. George Pataki, Sen. Lindsey Graham and former Gov. Rick Perry are all expected to have joined the Republican field. All four are considered long shots, but of that group, Perry — the longest-serving governor in Texas history and briefly the 2012 front-runner before flaming out — is best-positioned to gain traction, especially in Iowa.

“Perry, by far,” said one Iowa Republican. “I think he can win it if he keeps up what he is doing. This is a serious campaign that is doing all the right things. Long way to go, though.”

Most others weren’t so bullish — some said they couldn’t see any of the four gaining much momentum — but several other Iowans noted that Perry has been a frequent fixture in their state, a helpful perception in a place that demands significant face time from all of the candidates.

“Low expectations and he’s spending a lot of time in Iowa,” said one Republican in the state.

In New Hampshire, several said Pataki is “doing all the right things” but isn’t breaking through. There, Graham got a handful of votes, including from Democrats, who noted that Sen. John McCain, Graham’s ally, did well in the Granite State in 2008 and that Graham is also close with New Hampshire Sen. Kelly Ayotte.

“There’s a proven market for a McCain-like candidate in temperament and philosophy,” said a New Hampshire Republican, who observed that Graham and former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina are the two most likely GOP candidates to “make the leap from the pack to the top tier over time.”

Scott Walker won’t be the only one to skip Florida.

Earlier this week, the Wisconsin governor indicated that he’s likely to avoid competing in the Florida primary and will instead let Sunshine Staters Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio duke it out. Most Republican insiders expect he won’t be the only one to stay on the sidelines. Nearly 70 percent of Iowa and New Hampshire Republicans said they believe other candidates will stay out of it, citing the prohibitive cost of competing in such a big state.

“Very costly state and the home of two candidates,” an Iowa Republican noted.

Some, however, questioned Walker’s choice to telegraph that decision right now.

“Why these campaigns talk about skipping states is beyond me. It sends a bad message, they would be wise to let their actions speak for them,” another Iowa Republican said.

Several insiders also complained about the state party’s recent decision to make the Florida primary a winner-take-all contest.

“With a winner-take-all format, 2016 is the nightmare scenario for Florida,” a New Hampshire Republican said. “Two native son candidates who will have to spend big money to win, but who won’t get any bounce nationally, other than bragging rights, out of the outcome. Bush and Rubio just have to hope that the winner will need the delegates to push them over the top at the convention, which remains highly unlikely.”

These are the members of The POLITICO Caucus (not all of whom participated this week):